New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-01-03


bill to abolish competition among railroads
| Tho more the Interstate Commerce bill Is
| examined, the more this is found to be its
| character 1t is far FROM the purpose OF those
members who have most zealously favored the
bill to suppress that competition which has so
greatly reduced rates for transportation within
the past twenty years. But the true meaning
and effect Of the measure are better under
stood than they were at first, and those COM
panies which would have the least chance to
prosper in an era of competition for the favor
of the public are beginning to hope that the
bill may pass.
Hitherto free and Unrestricted mpetition
has governed the railway Development in this
country. In no other country has transportation
been so cheapeued, and no other great product
or important service has been 40 cheapened in
this country. Where government controls rail-
roads, rates are tar higher than on American
lines. Where the roads make their own rates,
bnt government controls the construction OF
new lines, Odious and burdensome monopolles
exist. In'Great Britain especially, industry Is
angrily protesting that it is strangled. and
foreign manufacturers are given advantages
fatal to British producers by the extortionate
charges of British railways. But in this country
some railroad managers testify that they see no
way to save railways from bankruptcy, unless
government will step in to suppress the free
competition between roads once built, or the
construction of new roads. This was the
rurport of evidence given by Mr.. Blanchard,
General Devereaux, and others of the abest
railway managers before the Senate Committee
of Investigation, and during the past eighteen
months, in the absence Of any restriction by
government the railroads have been exhaust
ing their shrewdest devices in the vain effort
to suppress competition among themselves.
Trunk lines which used TO charge an average
of 2, 8 or even 4 ceuts per ton per mile, now
charge lees than an average OF cent for all
freight and of necessity transport most of the
competing freight at a much lower rate. II is
not many years since az cents per 100 pOupds
was the lowest summer rate ever charged for
wheat from Chicago to New York, even in
times of most savage competition, and the
usual winter charge was from 60 cents to 81.
Now the roads cannot maintain 30-cent rate
in mdwinter, and do great part of their bust
ness at less than / 3 cents in summer
Is it desirable to stop the competition which
has wrought these marvellous changesf lt
has been possible for roads to transport at such
low rates and live, only because they had been
able to reduce rates less between non competing
points, and by con petition 70 wrest a great
part of the through traffic from the Canadian
roads and the water routes. But if compelled
10 charge as hiVh rate for through MS for local
frcig as high for competitive as for non
competitive freight, the trunk lines cannot
bring down the local to the through rate,
because the local traffic Gusts the must. They
must perforce abandon large part OF the
through traffic to the Canadian lines or to the
water routes, and compel the local traffic to
bear most Of the entire cost OF operating.
Between competing points, rates must be
governed by the rates charged between non
competing points, and thus competition must
be suppressed. This involves higher charges
for Transporting the grain, the cattle and the
cotton of Western and Southern farmers, and
yet those farmers are supposed to be anxious
for the passage of the bill.
In no possible way can the trunk lines con-
trive 70 transport all local and non-competing
freight at as low rates now charged for
through freights. In no possible way can they
do smaller business, losing part to TIE Canada
and the water routes, IA cheaply as they now
do larger business. The cost of transpOr-
tation must therefore be increased in spite
Of the railroad managers. Is that the
result desiredf Moreover, the bill would
operate powerfully to abolish competition
through the building of new lines. Where a
railroad penetrates n certain territory no
capitalist will dare to build another. auI the
people of that territory will be left to the
mercy Of an absolute monopoly. Is this what
the people desref One can understand why
railroad managers and operators in stocks may
be anxious to have competition between exist
III railroads abolished, and the Building of
new railroads prevented. But how can that
course be for the benefit of the Western farmers,
or for the benefit Of the Eastern consumers, or
for the good of the Nation as whoei
IORD G4IISRURYS OIERTTREG